Ubah Sekarang ! Bersihkan Malaysia
Friday, March 29, 2013
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
CM Lim Guan Eng : We hope that CAP can address the issue of public transport to the Federal government with the same energetic determination and frequency they do against the state government.
Press Conference Statement By Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng In Komtar, George Town On 27.3.2013.
Penang State Government’s Refusal To Endorse Consumer Association of Penang’s(CAP) Proposal To Impose Charges On Private Vehicles Entering Penang Island Has Caused Some NGOs’ To Join BN in Opposing The RM6.3 Billion Traffic Dispersal Project Of 3 Highways And Under Seabed Tunnel.
The Penang state government concedes that our refusal to endorse CAP’s proposal to impose charges on private vehicles entering Penang island has caused some NGOs’ to join BN in opposing the RM6.3 billion traffic dispersal project of 3 highways and under seabed tunnel. This is the price that the Penang PR state government has to pay to ensure freedom of movement, because such a policy of forcing vehicles entering Penang to pay is elitist at best in reserving Penang island only for residents and discriminatory at worst as it bars those who can not afford from entering the island.
CAP President S.M Mohd Idris’s open personal attacks against me in his response to my invitation to him for a dialogue on the proposed 3 highways and under seabed tunnel project is disappointing as he failed to respond factually and objectively. The state government had begun such public consultations since 2011 and his refusal to engage on this issue only emphasizes our point that subjective statements relying on mere sentiments does not contribute towards a civil society that stresses on civil discourse.
I will not indulge in such personal attacks but leave it to the public to judge under the oppressive restraints imposed by the Federal government, whose proposals to overcome traffic congestion in Penang is preferred. I wish to address some solutions to traffic congestion he had suggested which were dealt with by the state government.
On public transport, the state government had tried for the past 5 years to implement an effective and efficient model including suggestions by NGOs. Such efforts did not make any headway due to the intransigence of the Federal government and the refusal to co-operate such as BN’s failure to fulfil their 2006 promise of building a monorail, refusal to allow the state government to purchase our own buses to provide bus services and refusal to accept RM10 million yearly from the state government to provide free bus services throughout Penang during peak hours
However NGOs like CAP failed to notice that the state government had launched the initiatives such as providing free bus services in George Town as well as across the First Bridge from Seberang Jaya to Bayan Lepas and Balik Pulau. By demanding that the state government provide efficient shuttle service to main bus stops from housing estates ignores, the fact that this should be addressed to the Federal government.
We hope that CAP can address the issue of public transport to the Federal government with the same energetic determination and frequency they do against the state government.
The state government is all for dedicated lanes for buses, bicycles and pedestrians. However such lanes are not possible to be built under existing congested roads unless there are alternative ring roads around the city. These 3 highway projects and the tunnel are being planned to enable existing roads to be converted for dedicated lanes for buses, bicycles and pedestrians in the future.
CAP is wrong to say that the Transport Masterplan (TMP) does not recommend the building of the 3 highways and tunnel. The TMP released yesterday clearly shows that the 3 highways should be completed from 2017 to 2020 and the tunnel completed between 2025-2030. As the tunnel takes at least 12 years to complete due to the importance of fulfilling Detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (DEIA) studies, planning work must begin now.
CAP again distorts the present daily usage of 80, 000 vehicles on the Penang Bridge to mean that with the introduction of Penang 2nd Bridge and the tunnel, the two additional links will increase vehicle usage to 240,000 vehicles. The introduction of new links always reduces the number of vehicles per link and not the other way round. These new links will help to ensure that we do not turn the next generation into a “traffic-jam” generation.
The state government would have made clear this to CAP if S.M Mohamad Idris had been willing to meet us. However we regret his refusal to do so and despite his closed mind, our doors are still open to him should he wish to engage with us.
LIM GUAN ENG
——BM Version ——
Kenyataan Sidang Akhbar oleh Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang Lim Guan Eng di Komtar, George Town pada 27.3.2013
Kengganan Kerajaan Negeri Untuk Menyokong Cadangan Persatuan Pengguna Pulau Pinang (CAP) Untuk Mengenakan Caj Ke Atas Kenderaan Peribadi Untuk Memasuki Pulau Telah Menyebabkan Beberapa NGO Untuk Mengikuti BN Dalam Menentang Projek RM6.3 Bilion Pembinaan 3 Lebuhraya Dan Sebatang Terowong Bawah Dasar Laut Untuk Meleraikan Trafik.
Kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang mengakui bahawa keengganan kami untuk menyokong cadangan CAP untuk mengenakan caj ke atas kenderaan peribadi untuk memasuki Pulau telah menyebabkan beberapa NGO untuk mengikuti BN dalam menentang projek RM6.3 bilion pembinaan 3 lebuhraya dan sebatang terowong bawah dasar laut untuk meleraikan trafik. Kerajaan negeri PR Pulau Pinang terpaksa menanggung padah ini untuk memastikan kebebasan pergerakan, kerana dasar untuk mengenakan caj ke atas kenderaan yang ingin memasuki Pulau adalah elitis dan mendiskriminasikan orang yang tidak mampu.
Serangan peribadi secara terbuka oleh Presiden CAP SM Mohd Idris sebagai balasan kepada jemputan saya untuk berdialog atas cadangan projek 3 lebuhraya dan sebatang terowong bawah dasar laut adalah sangat mengecewakan kerana beliau telah gagal untuk membalas dengan fakta dan secara objektif. Kerajaan negeri telah memulakan rundingan awam sejak tahun 2011 dan keengganan beliau untuk berunding atas isu ini hanya menekankan hakikat bahawa kenyataan subjektif yang berasaskan sentimen tidak akan membantu membentuk masyarakat sivil.
Saya tidak akan berbalas serangan peribadi tetapi akan membiarkan rakyat awam untuk membuat keputusan untuk memilih di antar cadangan kerajaan Persekutuan atau cadangan kami untuk meleraikan kesesakan trafik. Saya ingin membawa ke perhatian beberapa penyelesaian yang dicadang beliau yang telah pun ditangani oleh kerajaan negeri.
Dalam hal pengangkutan awam, kerajaan negeri telah mencuba selama 5 tahun untuk melaksanakan model yang cekap dan berkesan termasuk cadangan-cadangan oleh NGO. Usaha-usaha ini tidak ke mana akibat keengganan kerajaan Persekutuan untuk bekerjasama seperti dalam kegagalan BN untuk menunaikan janji tahun 2006 untuk membina sistem monorel, keengganan untuk membenarkan kerajaan negeri untuk menyediakan perkhidmatan bas sendiri serta menolak tawaran RM10 juta daripada kerajaan negeri untuk penyediaan perkhidmatan bas percuma di seluruh Pulau Pinang semasa waktu puncak.
Namun begitu, NGO seperti CAP gagal untuk mengambil maklum bahawa kerajaan negeri telah melancarkan inisiatif-inisiatif seperti perkhidmatan bas percuma di George Town serta melintasi Jambatan Pertama dari Seberang Jaya ke Bayan Lepas dan Balik Pulau. Tuntuan bahawa kerajaan negeri harus menyediakan perkhidmatan ulang-alik dari perhentian-perhentian bas yang utama ke kawasan perumahan langsung mengabaikan hakikat bahawa isu ini adalah di bawah kuasa kerajaan Persekutuan semata-mata.
Kita harap agar CAP dapat menujukan masalah pengangkutan awam ini kepada kerajaan Persekutuan dengan semangat dan kekerapan yang sama seperti yang mereka lakukan terhadap kerajaan negeri.
Kerajaan negeri menyokong penuh lorong khusus untuk bas, basikal dan pejalan kaki. Walau bagaimanapun, lorong-lorong ini tidak mungkin dibina atas jalan-jalan yang sesak selagi tiada jalan alternatif yang mengelilingi pusat bandar. Projek 3 lebuhraya dan sebatang terowong bawah dasar laut ini adalah untuk membolehkan jalan-jalan sedia-ada untuk ditukarkan kepada lorong khusus bagi penggunaan bas, basikal dan pejalan kaki pada masa depan.
CAP juga salah kerana menyatakan bahawa Pelan Induk Pengangkutan Pulau Pinang (PIPPP) tidak mencadangkan pembinaan 3 lebuhraya dan terowoong. PIPPP yang telah dikeluarkan semalam jelas menyatakan bahawa 3 lebuhraya tersebut harus disiapkan menjelang 2017-2020 dan terowong pula menjelang 2025-2030. Oleh kerana terowong tersebut memerlukan masa 12 tahun kerana Penilaian Impak Alam Sekitar Penuh harus dilakukan, projek perancangan harus bermula dari sekarang.
CAP sekali lagi memutar belit penggunaan harian 80,000 buah kenderaan atas Jambatan Pulau Pinang untuk bermaksud bahawa dengan adanya Jambatan Kedua dan Terowong, maka laluan-laluan tambahan tersebut akan meningkatkan penggunaan harian kepada 240,000 buah kenderaan. Laluan-laluan tersebut akan mengurangkan penggunaan kenderaan pada setiap laluan dan bukannya meningkatkannya. Laluan-laluan ini akan bantu memastikan bahawa kita tidak akan menjadikan generasi akan datang sebagai generasi “kesesakan trafik”.
Kerajaan negeri akan menjelaskan semua ini kepada CAP jika SM Mohamad Idris sudi berjumpa. Walau bagaimanapun, kami berasa kesal atas keengganan beliau untuk berjumpa, dan walaupun begitu, pintu kami senantiasa terbuka kepada beliau sekiranya beliau ingin berunding.
—–Mandarin Version——
槟州首席部长林冠英于2013年3月27日在乔治市光大的记者会
槟州政府拒绝支持槟州消费人协会要求向收私人交通工具进入槟岛征收入城费的建议，已经导致一些非政府组织联合国阵一起反对以63亿令吉建三条高速公路与海底隧道的疏解交通阻塞计划。
槟州政府承认拒绝支持槟州消费人协会要求向收私人交通工具进入槟岛征收入城费的建议，已经导致一些非政府组织联合国阵一起反对以63亿令吉建三条高速公路与海底隧道的疏解交通阻塞计划。这是槟州民联政府需要承受的代价，以确保人们迁移的自由，因为这种强迫交通工具进入槟岛需缴入城费的政策，是一项只限保障槟岛居民享有槟岛的美好的精英主义政策，却糟糕地对无法负担进城费的人充满歧视。
槟消协主席SM 莫哈末依德利斯在他回应关于我邀请他出席3条高速公路及海底隧道对话会时，公开对我做出人身攻击，对此，我感到失望，因为他并不能实事求是的客观回应这项课题。州政府自2011年开始就不断咨询公众，但他拒绝接触这项课题，却只意气用事的强调主观的言论，这对要形成具有公民与论压力的公民社会并没有帮助。
我将不会理会如此的人身攻击，但会让公众自行判断，与联邦政府消极对待槟城的情况作比较，到底是要选择哪一个建议才能真正解决槟州的交通阻塞。我希望能说明，他所提起解决交通阻塞的建议，其实都是州政府已经尝试推行的措施。
在公共交通方面，州政府过去5年尝试推行有效的模式，当中也包括了非政府组织所给予的建议。这些努力最后都没有进展，因为联邦政府不妥协，也拒绝不合作。如国阵无法兑现他们在2006年说要建单轨列车的承诺、拒绝州政府购买自己的巴士以提供巴士服务，拒绝接受州政府每年1000万令吉在尖峰时刻提供免费巴士的要求。
无论如何，如消费人协会的非政府组织，并没有察觉槟州政府已经推行了乔治市免费巴士及提供从诗布郎再也及浮罗山背到峇六拜的免费巴士。而在要求州政府提供有效的住宅区巴士服务连接主要巴士站的时候，却无视这些要求其实应该向联邦政府反映。
我们希望槟消协能够以对抗州政府时，那种充满坚决斗志与弃而不舍的态度，向联邦政府反映公共交通的课题。
州政府非常乐意设立巴士、脚车及行人专用道。但是，在现有已极其拥挤的道路上，这些专用道的概念，几乎是不可能设立的—除非我们有替代公路，也即是内环公路。这三项主要道路工程及海底隧道计划，是为了让我们能够在未来策划把现有的道路转为巴士、脚车及行人专用道而设的。
槟消协指交通大蓝图并没有建议兴建三条大道及海底隧道是错误的。昨天宣布的交通大蓝图很明显地例出这三条大道需要在2017年至2020年之前建竣，而海底隧道则需要在2025至2030之间建竣。基于海底隧道需要约12年的时间兴建，以符合详细环境评估报告的研究及要求，因此一切的策划工作，都必需从现在开始进行。
消协称，第一大桥现有的车流量是每天8万辆，随着第二大桥及海底隧道的建立，意味着这两条额外通道，将会把引进槟岛的车流量增至每天24万辆交通工具。这是扭曲大桥车流量数据的说法。新通道的设立，永远会减少每条通道的车流量，而不是相反的。这些新的通道，将协助我们确保我们的下一代不会成不“塞车世代”。
若SM 莫哈末依德利斯愿意与我们会面，州政府将会明确地将这些讯息传达给他。然而，我们很遗憾他拒绝会面。尽管他对此尚有成见，但是，只要他有意会面，我们的大门，依然为他而打开。
林冠英
Penang State Government’s Refusal To Endorse Consumer Association of Penang’s(CAP) Proposal To Impose Charges On Private Vehicles Entering Penang Island Has Caused Some NGOs’ To Join BN in Opposing The RM6.3 Billion Traffic Dispersal Project Of 3 Highways And Under Seabed Tunnel.
The Penang state government concedes that our refusal to endorse CAP’s proposal to impose charges on private vehicles entering Penang island has caused some NGOs’ to join BN in opposing the RM6.3 billion traffic dispersal project of 3 highways and under seabed tunnel. This is the price that the Penang PR state government has to pay to ensure freedom of movement, because such a policy of forcing vehicles entering Penang to pay is elitist at best in reserving Penang island only for residents and discriminatory at worst as it bars those who can not afford from entering the island.
CAP President S.M Mohd Idris’s open personal attacks against me in his response to my invitation to him for a dialogue on the proposed 3 highways and under seabed tunnel project is disappointing as he failed to respond factually and objectively. The state government had begun such public consultations since 2011 and his refusal to engage on this issue only emphasizes our point that subjective statements relying on mere sentiments does not contribute towards a civil society that stresses on civil discourse.
I will not indulge in such personal attacks but leave it to the public to judge under the oppressive restraints imposed by the Federal government, whose proposals to overcome traffic congestion in Penang is preferred. I wish to address some solutions to traffic congestion he had suggested which were dealt with by the state government.
On public transport, the state government had tried for the past 5 years to implement an effective and efficient model including suggestions by NGOs. Such efforts did not make any headway due to the intransigence of the Federal government and the refusal to co-operate such as BN’s failure to fulfil their 2006 promise of building a monorail, refusal to allow the state government to purchase our own buses to provide bus services and refusal to accept RM10 million yearly from the state government to provide free bus services throughout Penang during peak hours
However NGOs like CAP failed to notice that the state government had launched the initiatives such as providing free bus services in George Town as well as across the First Bridge from Seberang Jaya to Bayan Lepas and Balik Pulau. By demanding that the state government provide efficient shuttle service to main bus stops from housing estates ignores, the fact that this should be addressed to the Federal government.
We hope that CAP can address the issue of public transport to the Federal government with the same energetic determination and frequency they do against the state government.
The state government is all for dedicated lanes for buses, bicycles and pedestrians. However such lanes are not possible to be built under existing congested roads unless there are alternative ring roads around the city. These 3 highway projects and the tunnel are being planned to enable existing roads to be converted for dedicated lanes for buses, bicycles and pedestrians in the future.
CAP is wrong to say that the Transport Masterplan (TMP) does not recommend the building of the 3 highways and tunnel. The TMP released yesterday clearly shows that the 3 highways should be completed from 2017 to 2020 and the tunnel completed between 2025-2030. As the tunnel takes at least 12 years to complete due to the importance of fulfilling Detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (DEIA) studies, planning work must begin now.
CAP again distorts the present daily usage of 80, 000 vehicles on the Penang Bridge to mean that with the introduction of Penang 2nd Bridge and the tunnel, the two additional links will increase vehicle usage to 240,000 vehicles. The introduction of new links always reduces the number of vehicles per link and not the other way round. These new links will help to ensure that we do not turn the next generation into a “traffic-jam” generation.
The state government would have made clear this to CAP if S.M Mohamad Idris had been willing to meet us. However we regret his refusal to do so and despite his closed mind, our doors are still open to him should he wish to engage with us.
LIM GUAN ENG
——BM Version ——
Kenyataan Sidang Akhbar oleh Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang Lim Guan Eng di Komtar, George Town pada 27.3.2013
Kengganan Kerajaan Negeri Untuk Menyokong Cadangan Persatuan Pengguna Pulau Pinang (CAP) Untuk Mengenakan Caj Ke Atas Kenderaan Peribadi Untuk Memasuki Pulau Telah Menyebabkan Beberapa NGO Untuk Mengikuti BN Dalam Menentang Projek RM6.3 Bilion Pembinaan 3 Lebuhraya Dan Sebatang Terowong Bawah Dasar Laut Untuk Meleraikan Trafik.
Kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang mengakui bahawa keengganan kami untuk menyokong cadangan CAP untuk mengenakan caj ke atas kenderaan peribadi untuk memasuki Pulau telah menyebabkan beberapa NGO untuk mengikuti BN dalam menentang projek RM6.3 bilion pembinaan 3 lebuhraya dan sebatang terowong bawah dasar laut untuk meleraikan trafik. Kerajaan negeri PR Pulau Pinang terpaksa menanggung padah ini untuk memastikan kebebasan pergerakan, kerana dasar untuk mengenakan caj ke atas kenderaan yang ingin memasuki Pulau adalah elitis dan mendiskriminasikan orang yang tidak mampu.
Serangan peribadi secara terbuka oleh Presiden CAP SM Mohd Idris sebagai balasan kepada jemputan saya untuk berdialog atas cadangan projek 3 lebuhraya dan sebatang terowong bawah dasar laut adalah sangat mengecewakan kerana beliau telah gagal untuk membalas dengan fakta dan secara objektif. Kerajaan negeri telah memulakan rundingan awam sejak tahun 2011 dan keengganan beliau untuk berunding atas isu ini hanya menekankan hakikat bahawa kenyataan subjektif yang berasaskan sentimen tidak akan membantu membentuk masyarakat sivil.
Saya tidak akan berbalas serangan peribadi tetapi akan membiarkan rakyat awam untuk membuat keputusan untuk memilih di antar cadangan kerajaan Persekutuan atau cadangan kami untuk meleraikan kesesakan trafik. Saya ingin membawa ke perhatian beberapa penyelesaian yang dicadang beliau yang telah pun ditangani oleh kerajaan negeri.
Dalam hal pengangkutan awam, kerajaan negeri telah mencuba selama 5 tahun untuk melaksanakan model yang cekap dan berkesan termasuk cadangan-cadangan oleh NGO. Usaha-usaha ini tidak ke mana akibat keengganan kerajaan Persekutuan untuk bekerjasama seperti dalam kegagalan BN untuk menunaikan janji tahun 2006 untuk membina sistem monorel, keengganan untuk membenarkan kerajaan negeri untuk menyediakan perkhidmatan bas sendiri serta menolak tawaran RM10 juta daripada kerajaan negeri untuk penyediaan perkhidmatan bas percuma di seluruh Pulau Pinang semasa waktu puncak.
Namun begitu, NGO seperti CAP gagal untuk mengambil maklum bahawa kerajaan negeri telah melancarkan inisiatif-inisiatif seperti perkhidmatan bas percuma di George Town serta melintasi Jambatan Pertama dari Seberang Jaya ke Bayan Lepas dan Balik Pulau. Tuntuan bahawa kerajaan negeri harus menyediakan perkhidmatan ulang-alik dari perhentian-perhentian bas yang utama ke kawasan perumahan langsung mengabaikan hakikat bahawa isu ini adalah di bawah kuasa kerajaan Persekutuan semata-mata.
Kita harap agar CAP dapat menujukan masalah pengangkutan awam ini kepada kerajaan Persekutuan dengan semangat dan kekerapan yang sama seperti yang mereka lakukan terhadap kerajaan negeri.
Kerajaan negeri menyokong penuh lorong khusus untuk bas, basikal dan pejalan kaki. Walau bagaimanapun, lorong-lorong ini tidak mungkin dibina atas jalan-jalan yang sesak selagi tiada jalan alternatif yang mengelilingi pusat bandar. Projek 3 lebuhraya dan sebatang terowong bawah dasar laut ini adalah untuk membolehkan jalan-jalan sedia-ada untuk ditukarkan kepada lorong khusus bagi penggunaan bas, basikal dan pejalan kaki pada masa depan.
CAP juga salah kerana menyatakan bahawa Pelan Induk Pengangkutan Pulau Pinang (PIPPP) tidak mencadangkan pembinaan 3 lebuhraya dan terowoong. PIPPP yang telah dikeluarkan semalam jelas menyatakan bahawa 3 lebuhraya tersebut harus disiapkan menjelang 2017-2020 dan terowong pula menjelang 2025-2030. Oleh kerana terowong tersebut memerlukan masa 12 tahun kerana Penilaian Impak Alam Sekitar Penuh harus dilakukan, projek perancangan harus bermula dari sekarang.
CAP sekali lagi memutar belit penggunaan harian 80,000 buah kenderaan atas Jambatan Pulau Pinang untuk bermaksud bahawa dengan adanya Jambatan Kedua dan Terowong, maka laluan-laluan tambahan tersebut akan meningkatkan penggunaan harian kepada 240,000 buah kenderaan. Laluan-laluan tersebut akan mengurangkan penggunaan kenderaan pada setiap laluan dan bukannya meningkatkannya. Laluan-laluan ini akan bantu memastikan bahawa kita tidak akan menjadikan generasi akan datang sebagai generasi “kesesakan trafik”.
Kerajaan negeri akan menjelaskan semua ini kepada CAP jika SM Mohamad Idris sudi berjumpa. Walau bagaimanapun, kami berasa kesal atas keengganan beliau untuk berjumpa, dan walaupun begitu, pintu kami senantiasa terbuka kepada beliau sekiranya beliau ingin berunding.
—–Mandarin Version——
槟州首席部长林冠英于2013年3月27日在乔治市光大的记者会
槟州政府拒绝支持槟州消费人协会要求向收私人交通工具进入槟岛征收入城费的建议，已经导致一些非政府组织联合国阵一起反对以63亿令吉建三条高速公路与海底隧道的疏解交通阻塞计划。
槟州政府承认拒绝支持槟州消费人协会要求向收私人交通工具进入槟岛征收入城费的建议，已经导致一些非政府组织联合国阵一起反对以63亿令吉建三条高速公路与海底隧道的疏解交通阻塞计划。这是槟州民联政府需要承受的代价，以确保人们迁移的自由，因为这种强迫交通工具进入槟岛需缴入城费的政策，是一项只限保障槟岛居民享有槟岛的美好的精英主义政策，却糟糕地对无法负担进城费的人充满歧视。
槟消协主席SM 莫哈末依德利斯在他回应关于我邀请他出席3条高速公路及海底隧道对话会时，公开对我做出人身攻击，对此，我感到失望，因为他并不能实事求是的客观回应这项课题。州政府自2011年开始就不断咨询公众，但他拒绝接触这项课题，却只意气用事的强调主观的言论，这对要形成具有公民与论压力的公民社会并没有帮助。
我将不会理会如此的人身攻击，但会让公众自行判断，与联邦政府消极对待槟城的情况作比较，到底是要选择哪一个建议才能真正解决槟州的交通阻塞。我希望能说明，他所提起解决交通阻塞的建议，其实都是州政府已经尝试推行的措施。
在公共交通方面，州政府过去5年尝试推行有效的模式，当中也包括了非政府组织所给予的建议。这些努力最后都没有进展，因为联邦政府不妥协，也拒绝不合作。如国阵无法兑现他们在2006年说要建单轨列车的承诺、拒绝州政府购买自己的巴士以提供巴士服务，拒绝接受州政府每年1000万令吉在尖峰时刻提供免费巴士的要求。
无论如何，如消费人协会的非政府组织，并没有察觉槟州政府已经推行了乔治市免费巴士及提供从诗布郎再也及浮罗山背到峇六拜的免费巴士。而在要求州政府提供有效的住宅区巴士服务连接主要巴士站的时候，却无视这些要求其实应该向联邦政府反映。
我们希望槟消协能够以对抗州政府时，那种充满坚决斗志与弃而不舍的态度，向联邦政府反映公共交通的课题。
州政府非常乐意设立巴士、脚车及行人专用道。但是，在现有已极其拥挤的道路上，这些专用道的概念，几乎是不可能设立的—除非我们有替代公路，也即是内环公路。这三项主要道路工程及海底隧道计划，是为了让我们能够在未来策划把现有的道路转为巴士、脚车及行人专用道而设的。
槟消协指交通大蓝图并没有建议兴建三条大道及海底隧道是错误的。昨天宣布的交通大蓝图很明显地例出这三条大道需要在2017年至2020年之前建竣，而海底隧道则需要在2025至2030之间建竣。基于海底隧道需要约12年的时间兴建，以符合详细环境评估报告的研究及要求，因此一切的策划工作，都必需从现在开始进行。
消协称，第一大桥现有的车流量是每天8万辆，随着第二大桥及海底隧道的建立，意味着这两条额外通道，将会把引进槟岛的车流量增至每天24万辆交通工具。这是扭曲大桥车流量数据的说法。新通道的设立，永远会减少每条通道的车流量，而不是相反的。这些新的通道，将协助我们确保我们的下一代不会成不“塞车世代”。
若SM 莫哈末依德利斯愿意与我们会面，州政府将会明确地将这些讯息传达给他。然而，我们很遗憾他拒绝会面。尽管他对此尚有成见，但是，只要他有意会面，我们的大门，依然为他而打开。
林冠英
Pakatan and Kit Siang Take the Offensive
By Kee Thuan Chye | from Yahoo! Malaysia
It looks like Pakatan Rakyat is driving the 13th general election. As this most crucial of Malaysian elections draws near, the Opposition coalition is the more gung-ho in leading the way into battle. It is initiating the charge, taking the offensive, scoring the psychological points.
While the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition is led by a leader who has been tardy in calling for the general election partly because he has been humming and hawing about wanting the rakyat to feel the effects of his transformation programmes first, Pakatan has already shown its preparedness by coming out with its manifesto a few weeks ago, way ahead of BN.
In football terms, this is like the away team, despite its disadvantageous position, taking the play to the home team and attacking its goalmouth. Sometimes, this can end in a victory for the outsiders.
DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang’s decision to stand in Gelang Patah – in BN’s impregnable state, Johor – is another courageous offensive. It is a risky move by the DAP veteran who has never fought shy of engaging in difficult battles.
In the most famous of his encounters, he took on Lim Chong Eu, the Chief Minister of Penang then, at Padang Kota in 1990 and won. Nonetheless, it was a huge gamble for Kit Siang, who has not always been victorious. He lost when he came out of his comfortable position as Kubu state assemblyman in 1982 to try and capture Bandar Hilir, and again when he took on the risky seat of Tanjung Bungah in 1995 against yet another chief minister, Koh Tsu Koon. In fact, throughout his political career, Kit Siang has lost five times.
More than its just being another manifestation of his penchant for rushing into areas where angels fear to tread, Kit Siang’s current foray into Gelang Patah is a forceful demonstration of psychological one-upmanship. It is sending out the signal that Pakatan is not afraid of BN. It is a demonstration of sheer confidence.
Granted, the voter composition of Gelang Patah is 54 per cent Chinese, but it also has a sizable Malay electorate at 33 per cent, many of whom are either staunch BN supporters for the sake of Umno or racially inclined ones who might vote for an Opposition candidate if he or she were Malay. The 2008 election result for that constituency indicates this. The PKR candidate then, Zaliha Mustafa, managed to secure 27,779 votes against incumbent Tan Ah Eng’s haul of 33,630. Contrast that with the landslide 41,001 votes won by Tan in 2004 when the Opposition candidate was Chinese and managed to get only 9,335 votes.
In 2013, even if 85 per cent of the Chinese voted for Kit Siang, there is no guarantee that he can romp home the winner. And getting that many is not going to be easy as Gelang Patah is known to be an ultra-safe seat for the MCA, which has been serving the people there diligently for nearly two decades. Furthermore, BN has been running a campaign instilling in Malays the idea that the DAP is poison to them, so Kit Siang might not be able to count on their support to carry the day. And the other 12 per cent of Indian voters could either be split between the two candidates or lean more towards BN.
In response to Kit Siang’s move, MCA President Chua Soi Lek has come out to call Kit Siang a “touch and go” politician. And this, he says, is the rude way of putting it, as compared to the polite one of “hit and run” politician.
Soi Lek is one to talk. He hasn’t even stated where he is going to stand. Will he even stand?
He said, “Serving the people is never in Lim Kit Siang’s dictionary.” But in saying that, he must be deliberately trying to appear ignorant. Throughout his career, Kit Siang has been consistent – indeed even one-track – in championing the cause of justice and democracy for Malaysia. Any Malaysian who is educated enough about Malaysian politics knows that.
For his untiring efforts, he has been detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) twice – in 1969 for 18 months, and in 1987 for 17 months. And in 1979, he was convicted under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) for exposing the Government’s purchase of four navy vessels.
Indeed, instead of disparaging Kit Siang, Soi Lek should stand against him in Gelang Patah. This would be a real test of whether the Chinese have high regard for him as MCA president.
Even one of MCA’s division chiefs is calling for that. Tan Cher Puk of Pasir Gudang said recently, “So far nobody knows whether the president will contest in the coming general election or not. The MCA (members) in some areas are experiencing low morale.” Well, if Chua decided to take on Lim, he would show that the MCA was not afraid, and that would certainly boost party morale.
As it is, the person touted to be MCA’s candidate is Teoh Sew Hock whom observers feel is too lightweight for Kit Siang. So it makes sense for the MCA to field a more worthy opponent.
There will be a real clash of titans if Soi Lek should go for it instead, even if it is viewed as such only because Soi Lek is MCA chief, and not much more. It will be one of the great highlights of the 13th general election that will be talked about long after the voting is over and done with.
The big question, however, is, would Soi Lek be brave enough to take on the man he so bravely belittles verbally? Or would he delegate it to someone else and opt for a safe seat himself?
It looks like Pakatan Rakyat is driving the 13th general election. As this most crucial of Malaysian elections draws near, the Opposition coalition is the more gung-ho in leading the way into battle. It is initiating the charge, taking the offensive, scoring the psychological points.
While the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition is led by a leader who has been tardy in calling for the general election partly because he has been humming and hawing about wanting the rakyat to feel the effects of his transformation programmes first, Pakatan has already shown its preparedness by coming out with its manifesto a few weeks ago, way ahead of BN.
In football terms, this is like the away team, despite its disadvantageous position, taking the play to the home team and attacking its goalmouth. Sometimes, this can end in a victory for the outsiders.
DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang’s decision to stand in Gelang Patah – in BN’s impregnable state, Johor – is another courageous offensive. It is a risky move by the DAP veteran who has never fought shy of engaging in difficult battles.
In the most famous of his encounters, he took on Lim Chong Eu, the Chief Minister of Penang then, at Padang Kota in 1990 and won. Nonetheless, it was a huge gamble for Kit Siang, who has not always been victorious. He lost when he came out of his comfortable position as Kubu state assemblyman in 1982 to try and capture Bandar Hilir, and again when he took on the risky seat of Tanjung Bungah in 1995 against yet another chief minister, Koh Tsu Koon. In fact, throughout his political career, Kit Siang has lost five times.
More than its just being another manifestation of his penchant for rushing into areas where angels fear to tread, Kit Siang’s current foray into Gelang Patah is a forceful demonstration of psychological one-upmanship. It is sending out the signal that Pakatan is not afraid of BN. It is a demonstration of sheer confidence.
Granted, the voter composition of Gelang Patah is 54 per cent Chinese, but it also has a sizable Malay electorate at 33 per cent, many of whom are either staunch BN supporters for the sake of Umno or racially inclined ones who might vote for an Opposition candidate if he or she were Malay. The 2008 election result for that constituency indicates this. The PKR candidate then, Zaliha Mustafa, managed to secure 27,779 votes against incumbent Tan Ah Eng’s haul of 33,630. Contrast that with the landslide 41,001 votes won by Tan in 2004 when the Opposition candidate was Chinese and managed to get only 9,335 votes.
In 2013, even if 85 per cent of the Chinese voted for Kit Siang, there is no guarantee that he can romp home the winner. And getting that many is not going to be easy as Gelang Patah is known to be an ultra-safe seat for the MCA, which has been serving the people there diligently for nearly two decades. Furthermore, BN has been running a campaign instilling in Malays the idea that the DAP is poison to them, so Kit Siang might not be able to count on their support to carry the day. And the other 12 per cent of Indian voters could either be split between the two candidates or lean more towards BN.
In response to Kit Siang’s move, MCA President Chua Soi Lek has come out to call Kit Siang a “touch and go” politician. And this, he says, is the rude way of putting it, as compared to the polite one of “hit and run” politician.
Soi Lek is one to talk. He hasn’t even stated where he is going to stand. Will he even stand?
He said, “Serving the people is never in Lim Kit Siang’s dictionary.” But in saying that, he must be deliberately trying to appear ignorant. Throughout his career, Kit Siang has been consistent – indeed even one-track – in championing the cause of justice and democracy for Malaysia. Any Malaysian who is educated enough about Malaysian politics knows that.
For his untiring efforts, he has been detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) twice – in 1969 for 18 months, and in 1987 for 17 months. And in 1979, he was convicted under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) for exposing the Government’s purchase of four navy vessels.
Indeed, instead of disparaging Kit Siang, Soi Lek should stand against him in Gelang Patah. This would be a real test of whether the Chinese have high regard for him as MCA president.
Even one of MCA’s division chiefs is calling for that. Tan Cher Puk of Pasir Gudang said recently, “So far nobody knows whether the president will contest in the coming general election or not. The MCA (members) in some areas are experiencing low morale.” Well, if Chua decided to take on Lim, he would show that the MCA was not afraid, and that would certainly boost party morale.
As it is, the person touted to be MCA’s candidate is Teoh Sew Hock whom observers feel is too lightweight for Kit Siang. So it makes sense for the MCA to field a more worthy opponent.
There will be a real clash of titans if Soi Lek should go for it instead, even if it is viewed as such only because Soi Lek is MCA chief, and not much more. It will be one of the great highlights of the 13th general election that will be talked about long after the voting is over and done with.
The big question, however, is, would Soi Lek be brave enough to take on the man he so bravely belittles verbally? Or would he delegate it to someone else and opt for a safe seat himself?
Monday, March 25, 2013
PRESS RELEASE: RADIO FREE MALAYSIA to start broadcasting on Monday…MW1359 kHz AM/MW
Press release: Sunday 24th March 2013
Radio Free Malaysia to start broadcasting on Monday with the Anwar Ibrahim interview the authorities tried to ban
Malaysia’s newest independent radio station begins broadcasting on Monday night. Radio Free Malaysia will be available on Medium Wave at 1359kHz each night between 9pm and 11pm local Malaysia time.
The highlight of the first show will be a full-length exclusive interview with the PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim, who, like other opposition figures, has been largely excluded from Malaysia’s mainstream media so far.
RFM represents a ground breaking venture, because it will be transmitted from outside of Malaysia and therefore is not subject to licencing by the federal government. The station therefore aims to be free of the political interferences that have caused Malaysia’s media to become recognised as one of the most restrictive in the world.
“RFM will be free of political censorship by the ruling BN coalition and plans to provide a platform for alternative ideas and viewpoints”, explains founder Clare Rewcastle Brown, who is basing the programme out of the UK.
“It is well known that all press and broadcast media currently operating in Malaysia are forced to unquestioningly support and promote the ruling BN coalition and to denigrate the opposition parties, while excluding them from the chance to put their own policies and agendas before the people”.
“It is unacceptable that Malaysia poses to the world as a democracy and is about to hold a general election, and yet it is only members of the ruling coalition (in power for the entire 50 years since independence) who are allowed to have their voices heard by the people”.
Radio Free Malaysia is a sister station of the existing short wave programme Radio Free Sarawak, which broadcasts on shortwave for the benefit of indigenous communities in East Malaysia. However, the new nightly programme will operate completely independently on the more accessible Medium Wave band and use only Bahasa.
“A separate team has come together to run this show and their remit is to provide two hours a day of the sort of programming that people have been unable to find on any other mainstream radio or TV in Malaysia”, says Rewcastle Brown. “Just a few days ago one independent station was forced to withdraw an interview with Anwar Ibrahim from broadcast owing to political pressures [http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/political-news/232472-bfm-anwar-interview-not-aired-due-to-regulatory-concerns.html. We do not intend to be bullied in this way and now we can bring people the interview that the authorities have tried to ban”
“Anyone wanting to find out what the opposition policies and arguments actually are will now be able to tune in to our show, which can be accessed on any radio set in Malaysia and find out. At last people without access to the internet will have the opportunity to make a more informed choice at the ballot box.
It is has also been of widespread concern that mainstream media outlets are being used by BN to spread politically motivated slanders and allegations about opposition figures and their policies, while at the same time refusing to allow them the space to answer the allegations or defend themselves in any way.
“Our short two hour programme provides a very limited opportunity for people who have been attacked in the media to exercise their right to reply. It is not much, but it is better than nothing and I anticipate that people from all over Malaysia will be intrigued to be able to tune in for the first time to the opposition’s response to the barrage of attacks they have been subjected to. We intend to punch above our weight, because we are providing a much needed service unavailable elsewhere”, said Rewcastle Brown.
The programme will also focus on stories, which have so far been the subject of a disgraceful blackout in the regular media, because they are judged inconvenient to BN. Only the more free on-line news platforms have been allowed to give proper coverage to such matters as the Scorpene submarine contract scandal; the corruption scandals involving the Chief Ministers of Sabah and Sarawak; the murder of the model Altantuya; the so-called ‘cowgate’ scandal and numerous other cases of corruption and controversy involving those close to the BN government.
These matters are waiting to find a place on Radio Free Malaysia, so that a wider public can be made aware of the issues that have been suppressed in their regular newspapers and broadcasts, which are subjected to total censorship by ‘News Controllers’ answerable to the Ministry of Information, Communications and Culture, say the producers.
“We would certainly be very pleased to also do interviews with any BN figures of significance who are willing to appear on our show”, confirms Rewcastle Brown. “However, they will not be getting the deliberate soft ride they are always accustomed to from the licenced media. We will ask tough questions about tough subjects, which as the people in charge of making decisions for the country they ought to be answering”.
Rewcastle Brown confirms that she will not be determining content. “There is a team of Malaysian producers and presenters who will be running Radio Free Malaysia, we are merely operating out of the UK in order to avoid censorship.”.
Radio Free Malaysia will also be operating a call in line so that listeners can take part in the show the toll free number is 1-800-815-309 and callers will be able to leave messages and their number at any time of the day.
The Radio Show will also be accessible on-line via podcast at its website www.radiofreemalaysia.org.
The station, which is operating independently of major donors, has launched a drive for donations via its website. We will not be able to maintain the project unless enough members of the public come to our help to support our costs. However, we are hopeful and confident that the millions of Malaysians, who are longing for a more free and open media will support us and keep us afloat ends
Radio Free Malaysia (RFM)
AM/MW 1359 kHz, 2100-2300 nightly
Also: www.radiofreemalaysia.org
Toll free number: 1-800-815-309
Email: info@radiofreemalaysia.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
